MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1998101404 · doi:10.1088/0004-6256/148/2/32

THE SLUGGS SURVEY:<i>HST</i>/ACS MOSAIC IMAGING OF THE NGC 3115 GLOBULAR CLUSTER SYSTEM

2014· article· en· W1998101404 on OpenAlexaff

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Astronomical Journal · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicGalaxies: Formation, Evolution, Phenomena
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
Fundersnot available
KeywordsGlobular clusterPhotometry (optics)GalaxyLuminosityHubble sequenceDwarf galaxyElliptical galaxyStar cluster

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We present Hubble Space Telescope/Advanced Camera for Surveys (HST/ACS) g and z photometry and half-light radii Rh measurements of 360 globular cluster (GC) candidates around the nearby S0 galaxy NGC 3115. We also include Subaru/Suprime-Cam g, r, and i photometry of 421 additional candidates. The well-established color bimodality of the GC system is obvious in the HST/ACS photometry. We find evidence for a "blue tilt" in the blue GC subpopulation, wherein the GCs in the blue subpopulation get redder as luminosity increases, indicative of a mass-metallicity relationship. We find a color gradient in both the red and blue subpopulations, with each group of clusters becoming bluer at larger distances from NGC 3115. The gradient is of similar strength in both subpopulations, but is monotonic and more significant for the blue clusters. On average, the blue clusters have ∼10% larger R h than the red clusters. This average difference is less than is typically observed for early-type galaxies but does match that measured in the literature for the Sombrero Galaxy (M104), suggesting that morphology and inclination may affect the measured size difference between the red and blue clusters. However, the scatter on the Rh measurements is large. We also identify 31 clusters more extended than typical GCs, which we term ultra-compact dwarf (UCD) candidates. Many of these objects are actually considerably fainter than typical UCDs. While it is likely that a significant number will be background contaminants, six of these UCD candidates are spectroscopically confirmed as NGC 3115 members. To explore the prevalence of low-mass X-ray binaries in the GC system, we match our ACS and Suprime-Cam detections to corresponding Chandra X-ray sources. We identify 45 X-ray-GC matches: 16 among the blue subpopulation and 29 among the red subpopulation. These X-ray/GC coincidence fractions are larger than is typical for most GC systems, probably due to the increased depth of the X-ray data compared to previous studies of GC systems.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.014
Threshold uncertainty score0.896

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.005
GPT teacher head0.193
Teacher spread0.188 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations27
Published2014
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Astronomical JournalSame topicGalaxies: Formation, Evolution, PhenomenaFrench-language works237,207